Mercia Blackcat
Striker
The Idiot is another of Dostoyevsky's. The main character has little materialistic attachment and in fact gives his inheritance away. He is also friends with a prostitute. Great author.
Do you believe Jesus existed?
- Thread starter DonaldDownTheWing
- Start date
Nero the dog
Midfield
I think Life of Brian was as accurate as the bible.
I do think that there was a bloke called Jesus going round Palestine with a little gang of followers. He probably said something like “ we are all children of god” then some smart arse replied with “he thinks he’s the son of God”.
Later in the pub the story was embellished about how they gave it to the son of god, and from there the problems of the world began.
I do think that there was a bloke called Jesus going round Palestine with a little gang of followers. He probably said something like “ we are all children of god” then some smart arse replied with “he thinks he’s the son of God”.
Later in the pub the story was embellished about how they gave it to the son of god, and from there the problems of the world began.
BiG
Central Defender
Thing is: he said a lot more than that, if you believe the stories. Which is why he was a threat. Which is why he was crucified.
I think in all probability that such a man did exist. I think he probably preached what you suggested and that he said a lot of cool stuff. Even if he didn’t use those precise words, the use of parable and the way he spoke and the manner of his teachings was generally pretty cool. Even if he didn’t say a lot of those things, a lot of them are still pretty cool.
He didn’t need to be the ‘son of god’ or the messiah of the tribes of Israel for the message to be pretty cool.
The problem that a lot of people have with the teachings is how they’ve been interpreted - particularly from a modern perspective. And how that interpretation has been used to further objectives that weren’t aligned with the teachings anyway. You could say the same of Mohammed’s teachings perhaps but I’m even less familiar with that detail than I am with Christian teachings. Except as someone if a particular age, it was incorporated into the school curriculum and I went to Sunday School.
But, getting back to the question in the thread title. Yes. I think so. Based on what I’ve read and heard over the years.
Turner the Cat
Central Defender
I understand that there were a lot of cult movements and fears of the end of the world at the time and in that sense it is quite accurate.
ilovehorswill
Striker
If he wasn’t real, why do so many sources agree he existed
He certainly made an impact while he was alive
It’s worth remembering what he stood for and what he ended up becoming could be two different things as his story has been messed with repeatedly to suit the needs of the church
He certainly made an impact while he was alive
It’s worth remembering what he stood for and what he ended up becoming could be two different things as his story has been messed with repeatedly to suit the needs of the church
Nero the dog
Midfield
He certainly wouldn’t have agreed with all these religions Hoarding as much wealth as they can.
JonMc
Striker
You're probably right in many ways but historians try their best with the limited evidence available.
Jesus's acomplishment was bringing religion to the masses. No longer was it the domain of kings and the very wealthy. You could get the milk and honey just by changing your life. Until the idea was hijacked of course but still a powerful philosophy.
ilovehorswill
Striker
He’d regret all that wasted effort hoying the moneylenders out the temple too
elder
Striker
Because it’s in their interest to believe he existed. Religions, theologians etc all want for that to be true and have a bias for it to be true. The bible is not in any way a historical account and shouldn’t be treated as such. It’s a collection of stories to bolster a belief in a particular faith. There could be some truth in it but even on this thread one of the staunch supporters says that you shouldn’t take the bible literally.
There’s even no conclusive proof of who the people who wrote the 4 gospels were, or which parts they wrote and which others wrote but were attributed to them. How can you take a book like that seriously?
I agree with you though “Jesus was way cool” and “No wonder there are so many christians”
DoctorMick
Striker
in each of your posts you refer to the gospels and the bible as if they’re the only record of the existence of Jesus when they’re not, far from it. It’s been pointed out several times but so far you refuse to even acknowledge it.
There are also lots of atheist historians who believe Jesus existed, what is their bias?
Ilios
Winger
I'm fine with the existence of some kind of blank-canvas, baseline Jesus that we know almost nothing about.
But you can't put confidence in his historicity in the same ballpark as Julius Caesar, because the evidence is absolutely staggeringly better for the latter. And it will be, because he was an incredibly significant person who left a dense historical and archaeological footprint. Jesus was a nobody, there wouldn't be archaeological evidence of him.
Last edited:
ilovehorswill
Striker
Christians were tight with their Jesus facts as you’d expect. There were many ecumenical councils the years after his death, an early groupthink where the factions could edit everything he did and said for their own purposes and agree to it as one
For example the Emperor Justinian did away with all talk of reincarnation during the Second Council of Constantinople in 535AD, presumably that was in the mix for over 500 years
Outside Christianity, Rabbis claimed he misled the faithful and Muslims name him as a prophet. Romans have him on record if only for executing his followers before they succumbed to Christianity themselves
It’s hard to say he didn’t exist with different religions recording their opinions of him
Edit: Flavius Josephus (Jewish), Pliny the Younger/Tacitus (Roman)
Last edited:
elder
Striker
I have acknowledged it and again they were from way after he was supposedly lived and just reference him, they dont validate or prove that he lived. they don't provide any documentary evidence of his life, or more importantly from a Roman perspective his trial and execution. the video that PinzaC55 posted discusses it and I also responded to the guardian article that Turner the Cat posted.
I also accept that he may have existed, which some athiests, jews other non christians accept. I just don't think he did and am just tired of people pointing to be bible as proof he existed.
S.S.R..
Winger
How hard would've it been to convince mostly illiterate middle-eastern fucks that you were the second coming? Probably would've fell for the "I've got your nose" trick, never mind wine-based shenanigans.
I reckon Jesus would've been the type to try and get you to download and app for Crypto Currency that he reckoned made him hundreds a week.
I reckon Jesus would've been the type to try and get you to download and app for Crypto Currency that he reckoned made him hundreds a week.
Last edited:
JonMc
Striker
The Bible isn't proof but there has been examples of The Bible corobarating some of the Jesus story. The bath houses where the big fella supposedly did his healing gigs were always thought to be some form of biblical analogy, even by the church but archeologists have since discovered ruins that coroborate those biblical accounts. Of course it takes painstaking rigourous investigation to sort truth from myth from analogy before we get anywhere close to accuracy.
I'm not at all religious but my favourite versions of the Jesus story (which I suppose includes Life of Brian) are the ones where the political atmosphere plays a huge part in him growing in influence and being targeted by the establishment. Bear in mind the Jewish rebellion against Roman occupation was among the fiercest resistance the empire ever encountered and someone who was gaining traction with a growing movement of supporters would be of interest to various factions back then.
I was interested by a short one-man play for TV Tony Robinson once did as Judas Iscariot, imagining that he'd gone undercover to follow Jesus at the behest of the rebels, hoping to politicise his movement against the Romans. His betrayal of him wasn't for the silver, it was because a martyr would be a more powerful and mobilising figure. Then when he killed himself it was out if terrible guilt because he'd come to love and believe in him and couldn't stand to be the traitor even though Jesus had basically told him to go through with it.
Mercia Blackcat
Striker
There will not be any Roman record of his execution. He was one of hundreds if not thousands of people crucified on the orders of Pontius Pilate without trial for sedition. Pilate also conducted genocide in Samaria before he was recalled by Rome because his hatred of the Jews was intense and his brutality towards them extreme even by Roman standards. The Pontius Pilate in the Gospels is nothing more than a parody, a ludicrous portrayal of this brutal psychopath who is presented almost as a good Christian, a just man, when nothing could be further from the truth. It was nothing short of appeasement to Rome. The trial by the Jews is pure fiction by Mark. So there was no record made at the time. Jesus was just one of thousands executed without even the basic recognition of who they were.
Another example of this appeasement is in Acts when Simon Peter allegedly visits the Roman centurion Cornelius and on the way has his table cloth vision. The regiment at Caesarea was one of the most brutal of the legions in Palestine and in fact after the Jewish war of 70 CE was sent home due to the level of its routine brutality. It was this legion which later destroyed the monastery at Qumran and then participated in the siege of Jerusalem. To portray a Centurion of that regiment as respected by all the Jewish people is ludicrous. There are numerous examples throughout the Gospels where Jesus is portrayed of being inclusive of Gentiles so why would Peter need to be reminded of this in the tablecloth vision unless the truth is that Jesus was more exclusive to Gentiles than is portrayed in the Gospels.
10:22 The men replied, “We have come from Cornelius the centurion. He is a righteous and God-fearing man, who is respected by all the Jewish people.
That is how they described Cornelius to Peter. As if.....you couldn't make it up....well Luke did when he wrote Acts.
Last edited:
Mercia Blackcat
Striker
The relevant section from Acts regarding the tablecloth vision that is related to inclusivity is:
10:01 At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion in what was known as the Italian Regiment.
10:02 He and all his family were devout and God-fearing; he gave generously to those in need and prayed to God regularly.
10:09 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray.
10:10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance.
10:11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners.
10:12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds.
10:13 Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”
10:14 “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”
10:15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”
10:01 At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion in what was known as the Italian Regiment.
10:02 He and all his family were devout and God-fearing; he gave generously to those in need and prayed to God regularly.
10:09 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray.
10:10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance.
10:11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners.
10:12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds.
10:13 Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”
10:14 “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”
10:15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”
Mercia Blackcat
Striker
So Rocky, the right hand man of Jesus, needed to be reminded of the inclusivity of Jesus' mission before meeting Cornelius?
Aye, I'll believe you Luke. Thousands wouldn't but I will.
Aye, I'll believe you Luke. Thousands wouldn't but I will.
Last edited:
